Essence Of Random Terror Is `Who's Next?'

WILLIAM SAFIRE THE NEW YORK TIMES

October 15, 2002|WILLIAM SAFIRE THE NEW YORK TIMES

MONTGOMERY COUNTY , Md. — In the endless media psychoanalysis and police profiling of the random murderer striking fear near the nation's capital, one possibility is rarely mentioned: that the sniper may be a terrorist affiliated with al-Qaida or otherwise inspired by Osama bin Laden.

Odds are against a conspiracy. The consensus is that the multiple assassin is a domestic madman, the most recent in a long line of serial killers. Such disgruntled loners, pseudo-religious weirdos and cold-blooded psychotics lusting for fame and vengeance have plagued American society for generations.

But the venue chosen by the most recent shooter is the capital of the U.S., a primary target of worldwide terrorism. Police have speculated that the sniper might well have an accomplice, perhaps a driver or supplier, which suggests a terrorist cell. And the effect of the operation is to strike fear into ordinary Americans at the focal point of the nation's political decision-making and media coverage.

If these weekday murders are the acts of a homicidal maniac and not part of a terrorist conspiracy, then surely the plotters of last year's devastating strikes at the Pentagon and New York's Twin Towers are saying: What a perfect follow-up, cheap and simple and maddening. Why didn't we think of that?

The systematic sniping technique is terrorizing. Suburban schools are frequently in "lockdown," a term hitherto reserved for prisons. Gas is self-served with great trepidation. We are all looking over our shoulders outside; I think twice about taking my dogs out for a walk.

That's because the essence of the random terror is "who's next?" Unlike the mass-murder attacks of Sept. 11, which produced horrific shock followed by mourning and grim determination, the near-daily shootings of individuals produce unrelieved tension. The stress that Israelis suffer every time they get on a bus is now hitting home to Washingtonians.

Our media megaphone heightens the fear. A free press cannot be ordered to play down the news -- and a manhunt for a serial murderer has always been news since Jack the Ripper -- but now this local murder spree is national news, and the time and space to cover it sustains a nationwide tension.

Just as terrorists used our aircraft to bring down our towers, they will try to use our media to bring down the level of our resolve. After this current spate of killings is ended, and even if, as expected, the relentless rampage turns out to have been the work of one or two crazies, the example will not be forgotten in the cells of al-Qaida. People in and near the world's great cities will be in danger of similar sieges instigated by terror networks.

Here are a half-dozen thoughts about countering pervasive fear:

1. We in the target audience should follow the story without becoming transfixed by it. It's undeniably worrisome; but if worrying is our thing, we have much else to worry about.

2. We in the media should cover serial crime without being overwhelmed by it, pulling in leads from alert tipsters without putting out panic and without elevating thugs to antiheroes.

3. Local police should improve ways to digest cross-county data, cooperate in sweeps and dragnets, and work with federal enforcement agents who are finally quelling past arrogance.

4. Congress should make it easier to identify ammunition and the weapons of individual destruction that fire it. Gun registration's time has come.

5. People who forthrightly admit to being afraid for themselves and their loved ones should consider the psychological defense afforded by common sense. In the lottery of life, the statistical likelihood of getting killed by a sniper is far less than that of being struck by lightning or winning the state-sponsored sweepstakes. That's cold comfort for the dozens bereaved, but should offer some perspective to those millions feeling personally threatened.

An overreaction to risk can be risky. For example, if informed that a threat of a smallpox epidemic had become real, people with common sense would choose to run the relatively tiny risk of vaccination.

The answer to the everyday fear so many understandably now feel is everyday courage. That is not the fearlessness that wins medals. It is the quotidian heroism built into human beings that enables us to bear those troubles that flesh is heir to.

Write to columnist William Safire at The New York Times, 229 W. 43rd St., New York, NY 10036.